Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2021-09
Integrated Assessment of the Environmental and Economic Effects of Resource Utilization Process for Lime/Gypsum Flue Gas Desulfurization Collaborative Desulfurized Gypsum
To solve the problems of difficult treatment of desulfurized gypsum and overmining of limestone, a kind of lime/gypsum flue gas desulfurization (FGD) collaborative desulfurized gypsum resource utilization process (LCS) was proposed. The system mainly includes the LCS-LFGD (lime/gypsum flue gas desulfurization system), LCS-C (desulfurized gypsum reduction calcining process), and carbon monoxide-coupled activated carbon reduction of SO2 to sulfur process (LCS-S). Taking a typical wet FGD unit of 300 MW power plant in China as an example, the limestone/gypsum flue gas desulfurization system (L-FGD) process was compared with the LCS by using the method of life cycle assessment and life cycle cost (LCC). The result shows that the overall environmental impact of the LCS is 0.2913. The environmental impacts of LCS-LFGD, LCS-C, and LCS-S were 0.1322, 0.1543, and 0.0048, respectively. Both LCS-LFGD and LCS-C are the key processes in this case study, and electricity consumption and coal gas consumption are the key substances in each key process. LCC analysis showed that although the initial investment of LCS was 4.32 × 106 USD ∼5.76 × 106 USD more compared with L-FGD, the running cost of LCS was 1.41 × 106 USD per year lower compared with L-FGD. Besides, the cost of ore mining, the quality of calcined products, and environmental protection policy will affect the financial cost of the process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Álvarez-AyusoE., QuerolX., and TomásA. (2006). Environmental impact of a coal combustion-desulphurisation plant: Abatement capacity of desulphurisation process and environmental characterisation of combustion by-products. Chemosphere, 65, 2009.
2.
ChuY.P., WangG.P., QianH., DaiH.X., JingQ.G., GengC.N., LiuL., and Jian-PingW.U. (2008). Technical feasibility study on utilization of FGD gypsum. Environ. Sci. Technol. 6, 86.
3.
CuiL., LiY., TangY., ShiY., WangQ., YuanX., and KellettJ. (2018). Integrated assessment of the environmental and economic effects of an ultra-clean flue gas treatment process in coal-fired power plant. J. Clean. Prod. 199, 359.
4.
De FeoG., and FerraraC. (2017). A procedure for evaluating the most environmentally sound alternative between two on-site small-scale wastewater treatment systems. J. Clean. Prod. 164, 124.
5.
DengS., LiY., LiuY., LongH.Y., ZhangF., and WangF. (2015). Life-cycle and sustainability analysis of limestone-gypsum wet flue gas desulphurization. J. Environ. Eng. Technol. 5, 186.
6.
DePriestW., and GaikwadR.P. (2003). Economics of lime and limestone for control of sulfur dioxide. In Proceedings of Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Mega Symposium. Washington, DC.
7.
Diaz-BossioL.M., SquierS.E., and PulsiferA.H. (1985). Reductive decomposition of calcium sulfate utilizing carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Chem. Eng. Sci. 40, 319.
8.
FengC., GaoX., TangY., and ZhangY. (2014). Comparative life cycle environmental assessment of flue gas desulphurization technologies in China. J. Clean. Prod. 68, 81.
9.
FengT., HuoM., ZhaoX., WangT., XiaX., and MaC. (2017). Reduction of SO2 to elemental sulfur with H2 and mixed H2/CO gas in an activated carbon bed. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 121, 191.
10.
HanB.J., YueT., JingP., ZuoP.L., WangC.L., QiS.F., and DingY.H. (2014). Study on comprehensive utilization status and technical route of FGD gypsum from coal-fired power plants. Appl. Mech. Mater. 675–677, 713.
11.
HongJ., ZhanS., YuZ., HongJ., and QiC. (2018). Life-cycle environmental and economic assessment of medical waste treatment. J. Clean. Prod. 174, 65.
12.
Hong-taoC. (2006). Impact of the lime and the lime stone quality on the desulphurization system. Shanghai Electric Power, 5, 474.
13.
HumeresE., PeruchM.D.G.B., MoreiraR.F.P.M., and SchreinerW. (2003). Reactive intermediates of the reduction of SO2 on activated carbon. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 16, 824.
14.
HumeresE., MendesdeCastroK., Moreira, R.d.P.M., Peruch, M.d.B., SchreinerW.H., AlievA.E., CanleM., SantaballaJ.A., and FernandezI. (2008). Reactivity of the thermally stable intermediates of the reduction of SO2 on carbons and mechanisms of insertion of organic moieties in the carbon matrix. J. Phys. Chem. C, 112, 581.
15.
Jian-minH. (2006). Comprehensive utilization of the desulphurization gypsum. Shanghai Electric Power, 5, 480.
16.
KrzywanskiJ., CzakiertT., BlaszczukA., RajczykR., MuskalaW., and NowakW. (2015). A generalized model of SO2 emissions from large- and small-scale CFB boilers by artificial neural network approach: Part 1. The mathematical model of SO2 emissions in air-firing, oxygen-enriched and oxycombustion CFB Conditions. 137, 66.
17.
KurodaH., NishimuraT., HashimotoT., NishimuraM., KandaO., and NozawaS. (1984). Limestone-gypsum flue gas desulfurization process. Google Patents.
18.
LahijaniP., ZainalZ.A., MohammadiM., and MohamedA.R. (2015). ChemInform abstract: Conversion of the greenhouse gas CO2 to the fuel gas CO via the boudouard reaction: A review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 41, 615.
19.
LamnatouC., Ezcurra-CiaurrizX., ChemisanaD., and Plà-AragonésL.M. (2016). Environmental assessment of a pork-production system in North-East of Spain focusing on life-cycle swine nutrition. J. Clean. Prod. 137, 105.
20.
LiJ., KobayashiN., and HuY. (2008). The activated coke preparation for SO2 adsorption by using flue gas from coal power plant. Chem. Eng. Process. 47, 118.
21.
LiuQ., LiC., and LiY. (2003). SO2 removal from flue gas by activated semi-cokes: 1. The preparation of catalysts and determination of operating conditions. Carbon. 41, 2217.
22.
MayJ.R., and BrennanD.J. (2003). Application of data quality assessment methods to an LCA of electricity generation. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 8, 215.
23.
MuR., ZuoJ., and YuanX. (2015). China's approach to nuclear safety—From the perspective of policy and institutional system. Energy Policy, 76, 161.
24.
OhJ.S., and WheelockT.D. (1990). Reductive decomposition of calcium sulfate with carbon monoxide: Reaction mechanism. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 29, 544.
25.
OkumuraS., MiharaN., KamiyaK., OzawaS., OnyangoM.S., KojimaY., MatsudaH., KyawK., GotoY., and IwashitaT. (2003). Recovery of CaO by reductive decomposition of spent gypsum in a CO− CO2− N2 atmosphere. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42, 6046.
26.
Shu-GangH.U., NiuH.L., and Xian-JunL. (2009). Experiment research on comprehensive utilization of FGD gypsum. Concrete, 235, 95.
27.
SrivastavaR.K., and JozewiczW. (2001). Flue gas desulfurization: The state of the art. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 51, 1676.
28.
TaiF., ZhaoX., TaoW., XiaoX., and MaC. (2016). Reduction of SO2 with CO to Elemental Sulfur in Activated Carbon Bed. Energy Fuels. 30, 6578.
29.
WangQ., LiuW., YuanX., TangH., TangY., WangM., ZuoJ., SongZ., and SunJ. (2018). Environmental impact analysis and process optimization of batteries based on life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 174, 1262.
30.
WoodwardD.G. (1997). Life cycle costing—Theory, information acquisition and application. Int. J. Project Manage. 15, 335.
31.
WuX., WuK., ZhangY., HongQ., ZhengC., GaoX., and CenK. (2017). Comparative life cycle assessment and economic analysis of typical flue-gas cleaning processes of coal-fired power plants in China. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 3236.
32.
XiaX., ZhaoX., ZhouP., FengT., MaC., and SongZ. (2020). Reduction of SO2 to elemental sulfur with carbon materials through electrical and microwave heating methods. Chem. Eng. Process. 150, 107877.
33.
XuR., and HouF. (2010). Integrating LCA and LCC study of FGD system at a thermal power plant in China. J. Softw. 5, 1425.
34.
YuliS., DaboG., JingM., ZhuL., HeikeS., JianghuaL., and ZhifuM. (2018). Rapid growth of petroleum coke consumption and its related emissions in China. Appl. Energy, 226, 494.
